Form ALWAYS Follows Function?

When someone pulls the 30 year (old?) experience card, I always find it beneficial to prepare for the next conversation. In this case, a quick dive into the origins of "form follows function’ can help prepare you for an engaging dialog with “the boss”. Afterall, to introduce another quote “knowledge is power” Sir Francis Bacon.
The actual quote by the American Architect, Louis Sullivan was “form ever follows function”
"It is the pervading law of all things organic and inorganic,
Of all things physical and metaphysical,
Of all things human and all things super-human,
Of all true manifestations of the head,
Of the heart, of the soul,
That the life is recognizable in its expression,
That form ever follows function. This is the law.”

Bauhaus designers effectively adopted “form follows function”, with the specific focus on “ornament is a crime”.
Even Frank Lloyd Wright weighed in: “Form follows function - that has been misunderstood. Form and function should be one, joined in a spiritual union.”
You could always take the Hartmut Esslinger and Frog Design’s dictum “Form follows fun”, but even that seems so 80’s.
James Rait’s cites “form follows communication” on his blog, and has yet another perspective from KarimRashid:
“Remember, we live in a world where beauty is finally appreciated again and innovation, technology, are shifting our social life. A bottle is no longer a just a stylized bottle but an artistic instrument for engaging brand, a philosophy, and an experience, in our new global lifestyle.”
Whatever your position is, continue to believe in it.
My take: “Form is…function does, now lets focus on experience!”

Good stuff guys/gals.

I think Yo hit it on the head with the functionalists being a cult.

This is really the first time I have had a boss that was SO entrenched in this philosphy. We are all taught “Form Follows Function” in Design School but we are also taught that you have to use it to influence your work but not dictate it.

I will definitely you some of the advice from the previous posts and see where it goes. For all I know, I may be able to convert him, or at least loosen him up a little.

here it is in a nutshell, any damn form you get a woody over AS LONG AS IT WORKS!!! NO UNOBTAINUM, NO HAND WAVING, NO BULLSHIT…make sure it works, nothing worse that designed crap that works like crap.

Visual appeal is a function. If a detail of your designs has no other purpose than to delight the viewer, that is enough. Beauty is useful.

Great quote!

First tel your boss that he is correct (to end the discussion).

Then, explain that aesthetics also have symbolic functions.

The “look” of the product is directly related to perception and how it will be interpreted by different market segments, how it will affect branding, and how it will be used by the end users to differentiate themselves.

What happens is that the product doesn’t tell anything itself… but is the users who put different values on objects. This values will heavily depend on cultural perceptions and conventions.

We, as designers, do our best to understand those cultural codes, and trough a correct implementation of the product language, try to evoke specific values that will create an emotional response from the user and society.

I love this topic :smiley:

Regards!

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Something to really wrap your head around…

As a student who probably knows less than all who have posted prior to my post, I have to agree with what Yo said.

Also, “By Design” by Ralph Caplan, addresses ‘form follows function’ in quite a clear way. Really good read.

for better or worse, sometimes brand differentiation is the function

see thread on redesigning crappy products…

I found this quote today, I think it has an extra part we don’t see too often:

Less is only more where more is no good.
Frank Lloyd Wright

And my favorite:

“In anything at all, perfection is finally attained not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away.”
Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

This is really an interesting and never end topic. I prefer to say form should always follow value, which is the point that customers would buy. In value management field, value=function/cost. But function here has a broader definetion. It contains aesthetics aspect. And for different kind of projects, the aesthetics plays different role—the importance varies from one product to another:)

This.

However “works” is a very broad term. “Works” translates to “functions”, and the function could simply be to provoke an emotional response, sometimes form is the best way to accomplish that function. Emotional responses can evoke perceptions of value that are sometimes so powerful in the user that the quality of other functions is oft overlooked.

Form and function working in seamless symphony in order to satisfy and/or delight the user is the over-arching goal of design.

Challenge your boss to design something that functions without form.

Call him out on the car he drives and explain that a well tuned and maintained Yugo can get him from point A to point B just as sufficiently.

I can’t remember the source, but many years ago one of our more visible and experienced colleagues gave his take on the dictum. “Form follows function…chronologically.” First make sure it works, then address aesthetics, emotion, differentiation etc.

In support of giggle’s point, why don’t all products that function equally well look exactly the same? Because at that point everything becomes a commodity, and that’s neither a very good way to be profitable nor satisfy the consumer’s desires. Needs maybe, but not wants, and we all know how rational we are as consumers. If giggle’s boss (and his bosses) only wants to sell to purists, the idea may hold a little more water, but not much. Do all good designers agree on which form best expresses or compliments the function? Hardly.

I personally think modernism is so confused, drawing from so many different sources we are long-overdue a new movement in design.

this is what we as designers need to address. look how long the bau-haus has had in terms of influence, why should it persevere into the 21st century, in an age of wireless fun. we are being tied down.

wireless fun, crap upon crap upon steaming crap headed for the land fill in 12 months or less. Phones that do everything but are unusable, music systems that isolate, media that is generaly forgetable, all in all a digital romper room to keep the kiddies buying and buying MORE CRAP.

all software is with out “form”…

Antoine de Saint-Exupéry is 100% right…except where it comes to lace underware on a supurb looking woman.

True of the code, not of the interface.

Interesting reading the viewpoints here - thanks to all!